but only because I've had that conversation a million times.
Particularly the reasonable question about how you get the top people to take more equitable salaries -- that's what collective bargaining is FOR. To ensure the workers are paid something within the realm of what their labour is worth rather than just having all the money go to the top.
I come from an industrial city that had two primary plants -- one was union and one wasn't. And whenever the local press examined who was the better employer, it always turned out to be the non-union plant. But it was because the non-union plant wanted to stay non-union, so they let the OTHER company fight it out with their workers and then they just matched the result. So the other plant's union not only helped their workers, they set the standard the other company (wisely) matched.
